Hi all, It could be worth updating http://darcs.net/Ideas/Branches with any new results/thinking from this discussion.
As I understood things, darcs devs understand the need for in-repo branches. Getting a good design for it and making it happen will take a bit more effort. Now if we could just get packs out the door one of these days… Cheers, Eric On 22 Feb 2013, at 15:37, Michael Hendricks wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <step...@xemacs.org> > wrote: > Ben Franksen writes: > > No problem, as 'darcs get' gives you a new copy of the sources. > > This is slow and requires changing directories to work, not to mention > a "make world" rather than a "make one .o and relink". > > Here's another data point in favor of multiple branches inside a single > directory. Many developers now work in IDEs or similar tools. These tools > almost always have a notion of "project" which hardcodes a directory. If > switching branches requires switching directories, one must have multiple > "projects" and synchronize configuration among them. > > I rarely work in an IDE and darcs has caused me grief in this respect. I can > imagine how IDE-centric developers would feel. > > -- > Michael > _______________________________________________ > darcs-users mailing list > darcs-users@darcs.net > http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users -- Eric Kow <http://erickow.com> _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
